UK Against Fluoridation

Sunday, February 28, 2010

Chinese fluoride is a homeland security matterCumberland Times-News February 28, 2010 — The Pure Water Committee of Western Maryland Inc. was formed in 1960 as a grass roots network of citizens with a 50-year-old mission to educate the public of the complete fraud of the practice called water fluoridation. Recently, it has come to my attention in an engineering report for the city of Boulder, Colo., that they did an evaluation of fluoridation chemicals and sources and found that much of the fluoride chemicals used for water fluoridation are now coming out of China with arsenic and lead levels of 50 and 40 milligrams respectively per bag and non-existent regulatory monitoring of the salt or acid compounds from these imports. This type of trade from a country with a track record of lead paint on toys to antifreeze in cough syrup medicine is completely unacceptable. After visiting the Frostburg Water Filtration Plant on Feb. 23, it has come to my attention that Frostburg has sodium fluoride bags with no source or import information on them. Only after I asked for the certificate of analysis from Solvay fluorides through Univar USA, which is the chemical supplier for the Frostburg Water Plant, did I receive the certificate of analysis from Shanghai Mintchem Development Co., LTD., the Chinese manufacture of the sodium fluoride. The material safety data sheets from Solvay fluorides shows that a teaspoon amount of 5 grams of sodium fluoride can be fatal to an average size man of 70kg. In toxicological information section, chronic toxicity by oral route may cause skeletal and dental fluorosis, thyroid, testes, kidney, liver, ambiguous carcinogenic and mutagenic effects, fetotoxic and fertility effects. I have asked now for two years for the Frostburg Mayor and Council to put in the water bill for area residence the ADA warning to not to use fluoridated water when making infant formula, but to no avail. I have showed them the 2003 sixth edition PDR special warning section for Luride (sodium fluoride in pill form) that children under the age of six should not be taking the same equivalent dose that municipalities add to the drinking water. I asked them why they would continue this practice when the PDR states that not even a dentist or doctor should be administering this equivalent dose to a child under the age of 6. I have explained to them that the warning label on fluoride toothpaste states, that if you swallow more than a pea size amount of paste or .25 milligrams of fluoride, which is the equivalent dose of 8 ounces of fluoridated water, you should contact the poison control center immediately.We can no longer trust our local governments to do the right thing for its citizens. I find it so ironic that the same federal government that is demanding small communities under the clean water act, like Mount Savage to join to the Frostburg Regional water supply, because of an overt concern over possible ground water contamination, then allows this toxic waste byproduct from China to enter this country and be added to this same regional water supply. Are we insane? Instead of the city of Frostburg being honest with me over this imported chemical use and stopping this harmful practice, they seem more concerned over my visit to the water plant to obtain this information.

This is a serious homeland security matter for Frostburg and many other fluoridated communities, including Cumberland. Please contact both Frostburg and Cumberland elected officials and ask for this practice to be halted immediately.

(03-03-2007) Bill Burrs Fluoride Conspiracy Theory [Part 2/3]

Saturday, February 27, 2010

"NPR: 'In California, it's been seven months since some 3 million poor and disabled adults lost their dental coverage to budget cuts. ... While the recession may be easing, California and other states across the country continue to face eye-popping budget deficits. As a result, states are cutting deep into public health programs, and dental benefits for Medicaid recipients top the list. ... Before the state budget cuts, Medicaid patients here could get annual exams, cleanings and, if needed, root canals to save their teeth. ... In interviews with dozens of dentists and safety-net clinics around California, providers say patients are forgoing routine cleanings and delaying care until the pain is unbearable

California where hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent implementing fluoridation:NYSCOF

UK - Southampton - Daily Echo

No SHA board members available to receive fluoride protest letterWe have been snubbedBy Jon ReeveJon.reeve@dailyecho.co.uk

IT'S an arrogant snub. Anti-fluoridation campaigners have reacted angrily to health chiefs' refusal to personally receive a letter urging them to change then- minds over the controversial scheme for Southampton and surrounding areas.They say the move is proof South Central Strategic Health Authority is unwilling to listen to the people.More than 20 members of Hampshire Against Fluoridation (HAF) travelled to the SHA's Newbury HQ yesterday to deliver open letter signed by 170 not even allowed in to deliver the letter.After a debate with security guards, a single protester was eventually allowed inside.But none of the 12 SHA board members, who a year ago yesterday voted in favour of adding fluoride to the water delivered to almost 200,000 people in and around Southampton, were there to accept the letter. Instead it was handed to a lowly receptionist.HAF member Jennifer Godschall said: "The chief executive conveniently found that he had another urgent appointment so wasn't around to receive our letter, which is a disgrace."There are 12 members of the SHA (board). Someone should have been here to receive that letter."It was an arrogant snub. They have been arrogant throughout the whole process."Anna Peckham, the campaigner allowed inside to deliver the letter, said the board members' absence shows that public opinion doesn't matter.She said: "I think clearly the implications are that they're not listening to the people, they've made that quite clear." Nobody from the SHA was available for comment last night.

Friday, February 26, 2010

Protesters call for change of mind over fluoridation of water12:53pm Friday 26th February 2010By Jon ReeveLISTEN to the people and change your mind. Professors, politicians, dentists and even oyster fishermen are among those today demanding health chiefs reverse their decision to add fluoride to the water supplies of almost 200,000 Hampshire residents. A year to the day after NHS bosses voted for fluoridation for parts of Southampton and the surrounding area, campaigners were due to descend on their offices to protest.

Today’s anniversary comes as the Daily Echo can reveal that delays caused by a legal challenge mean the earliest fluoride could be added to water supplies is likely to be spring 2012.

A high court spokesman confirmed yesterday the earliest the judicial review could be heard by a senior judge is “July or August”.

South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA), which has set aside £400,000 for the legal fight, said last February it hoped to have everything in place to deliver fluoridated water by the end of 2010, but with its talks with Southern Water on how to implement the scheme suspended since last June, it looks set to miss that target by more than a year.

A spokesman yesterday said it would be inappropriate to discuss when fluoride could become a reality, because it would involve “speculating” on the timing and outcome of the judicial review.

NPWA poster

fluoride psa .mp4

Rous seeking clearer picture Andy Parks | 25th February 2010Rous Water has deferred a decision about whether to proceed with building four fluoride dosing plants at Corndale, Clunes, Dorroughby and Knockrow and is taking legal advice on a number of issues to do with their statutory authority....

"C" Grade For OK Child Dental Care Reported by: Emily SinovicA new study out today criticize's Oklahoma's dental care for children. The Pew Center study graded all states' dental care for children and gave 36 states, including Oklahoma, a "C". The report summarized Oklahoma's care with the following statement:"Oklahoma meets just half of the eight policy benchmarks aimed at addressing children’s dental health needs. Even though 40 percent of third graders in Oklahoma have untreated tooth decay, the state lacks a school-based sealant program.......

And nearly 74 percent of Oklahoma’s population had access to community water supplies with optimal fluoride

..........."The very best way to get a pet to brush is to start training them young," Hyde said. "And you should always use an approved toothpaste for pets and not human toothpaste with fluoride, which can be dangerous to animals.".....

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Dr David Kennedy -1

Cal Dental Assoc - No Fluoride for Babies By nyscof The California Dental Association (CDA) joins a growing list of researchers, dental and health organizations advising against regularly mixing infant formula with fluoridated water to avoid discoloring babies' developing teeth (fluorosis). But little effort is made to inform the public, reports the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc. (NYSCOF) "Neither a nutrient nor required for healthy teeth, fluoride chemicals are added to many public water supplies and some bottled water in a failed attempt to reduce tooth decay," says attorney Paul Beeber, NYSCOF President. "...mixing powdered or liquid infant formula concentrate with fluoridated water on a regular basis for infants primarily fed in this way may increase the chance of a child’s developing enamel fluorosis," according to the CDA's Feb 2010 Report, Oral Health During Pregnancy and Early Childhood: Evidence-Based Guidelines for Health Professionals. (1) In March 2006, the National Research Council (NRC) cautioned that infants can fluoride-overdose via reconstituted baby formula. (2) The American Dental Association (ADA) passed this information on to its members in a November 2006 e-gram (3) which the ADA reaffirmed and strengthened in a November 2009 News Release (4) . The ADA defines moderate fluorosis as “All tooth surfaces affected; marked wear on biting surfaces; brown stain may be present” and severe fluorosis as “All tooth surfaces affected; discrete or confluent pitting; brown stain present.” Mild fluorosis is white spotted teeth affecting about 25% to 50% of tooth surfaces. (5) National data (1986–-1987) shows dental fluorosis is a huge U.S. problem with 62 percent of 5 - 17 year-olds afflicted with white spotted, yellow, brown and/or pitted teeth. (6) Data from 1999-2000 shows that fluorosis has increased further since then. (7 ) The Food and Drug Administration ruled that fluoridated bottled water cannot be marketed for infants as a decay preventive. ( 8 ) In November 2007, The Globe and Mail quotes ADA spokesman and University of California dental professor, Howard Pollick, as saying the ADA recommendation applies to infants under one year of age who consume a lot of formula and "are at risk for developing some level of dental fluorosis." Dr. Pollick said the risks occur at the level of fluoride recommended for U.S. water systems. (9) Health Canada reported in 2008 "The consumption of powdered infant formula reconstituted with fluoridated water could lead to excessive intake of fluoride in infants."(10) Other government and medical groups which advise against mixing infant formula with fluoridated water: The Centers for Disease Control (11) The Academy of General Dentistry (12) The Vermont Department of Health (13) Delta Dental (14) The Minnesota Dental Association (15) This information has been known for decades: "Studies of fluoride levels of baby formulas and cereals have shown a significant increase in the fluoride content when fluoridated water was used for processing these foods," was reported by Kumar et al. in the May 1989 American Journal of Public Health. Some scientists tried in vain [in January 1990] to get the word out as described in "Suppression by Medical Journals of a Warning about Overdosing Formula-Fed Infants with Fluoride," published in 1997 in the Journal Accountability in Research. (17) "Four major [fluorosis] risk factors were consistently identified: use of fluoridated drinking water, fluoride supplements, fluoride toothpaste, and infant formulas before the age of six years," reported Mascarenhas in 2000 (July-August Pediatric Dentistry). (18) "Infant beverages, particularly infant formulas prepared with fluoridated water, can increase the risk of fluorosis in primary teeth," reported Marshall et al. in Journal of the American College of Nutrition (April 2004) (19) "A major effort should be made to avoid use of fluoridated water for dilution of formula powders (Fluoride in Dentistry)." (20) "Our analysis shows that babies who are exclusively formula fed face the highest [fluorosis] risk," reports the Environmental Working Group. (21) "The entire Board [Burlington VT Board of Health] holds serious concerns about the current fluoride exposure of infants between the ages of zero and six months. We deem this exposure to be a 'significant public health risk', and one that should be given immediate attention by the city and state." (22) "Some risk of increasing fluorosis may be attributed to the ingestion of powdered infant formula reconstituted with fluoridated water," (Pizzo et al. Clinical Oral Investigations, Feb 2007) (23) At least eleven other studies link reconstituted formula with fluorosis.(24a-k).

Quebec eyes Gatineau in bid in increase fluoridation rates Province set to pay but 'philosophical decision' is city's By Dave Rogers, The Ottawa CitizenFebruary 22, 2010 The Quebec government is hoping Gatineau will agree to put fluoride in its water supply, and is even willing to pay for it, but it could wait a long time for city leaders to agree.

Denise Laferrière, a Hull sector councillor and president of the city's Ville en Santé advisory commission said last week that fluoridation -- recommended by multiple public-health authorities as a way of fighting tooth decay -- is a provincial responsibility and adding fluoride to drinking water is no longer a priority for the local health body.

Laferrière said many Quebecers distrust fluoridation because it adds another chemical to the environment, adding most people who sent e-mail messages to the city about the issue oppose fluoridation.

"Public health is the responsibility of the province of Quebec, so fluoridation is not a priority for us now," Laferrière said. "I know that fluoride has been added to Ottawa drinking water for almost 50 years, but in Quebec we are cautious about it.

"People feel they don't need to drink fluoride to protect their teeth because they can use toothpaste. They reject fluoride as one more chemical going into the river."...........................

Monday, February 22, 2010

Flouride Trial in Northland claimed to be illegalPosted: February 22, 2010ILLEGAL FLUORIDE TRIALThe Northland DHB-MoH-FNDC’s fluoride trial for Kaikohe and Kaitaia was illegal.Under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO) 1996 and HSNO Regulations 2001 sodium fluoride (NaF) is classified as a most hazardous substance with strict controls and the council needed an Approved Handler’s Test Certificate specifically for using and tracking the hazardous substance. They never had one, so they were using it illegally, and the MoH’s 3 fluoride plants were operating illegally too. They all breached the HSNO Act regulations and I have lodged a complaint against the FNDC and Transfield Water Services with the Dept of Labour (HSNO Act enforcers). Also implicated are the NDHB, the MoH, the ethics committee and Orica Chemicals too.

Sodium fluoride is not allowed to be put into water for people to drink and it’s not supposed to go into the environment like that either. It’s classified as toxic, ecotoxic and bioaccumulative, is acutely toxic and a marine pollutant.

The Northland DHB stated No on their Ministry of Health (MoH) ethics committee trial research application form, when asked “Will any potential toxins, mutagens or teratogens be used? (ref Ethical Principles B 17.). Therefore they didn’t answer the next part which was “If yes, specify and outline the justification for their use.” Yet sodium fluoride is all those things so they made another false statement yet again, for the MoH’s grand pre-determined fluoride agenda for the North, and beyond. These serious adverse health effects were known in 2001.

The NDHB’s fluoride trial and results have become invalidated surely, and so has the supposed and rigged ’need’ for a fluoride referendum for Kaikohe and Kaitaia too, as the MoH’s 3 fluoride sheds were operating illegally which cancels out that MoH agreement condition too.

So the fluoride can just stay out permanently as the council as the ‘health authorities’ and council acted illegally and they also put the communities directly in potential harm as they mass poisoned the people and the environment for a fake ‘research’ trial so they could try and force the poison onto us all.

Targetting Maori children in Te Tai Tokerau specifically to drink this poison was and is absolutely disgraceful. Shame on all involved.The breaches to the HSNO Act are very serious. The only consultation and approval finally listed with the ethics committee was the NDHB’s paid own hospital’s Kaunihera Council (conflicted) and the Maori Dental Association (conflicted)! What about the whanau, hapu and iwi themselves?! It was aimed at all our reticulated water supplies too. It was a blatantly racist, illicit trial.

How are they all going to explain the absence of ’tracking’ for the poison for 2 years? How could they track it if they never had the authorised Certificated Handler? And the Northland DHB paid the FNDC for all the poison and the operating costs too.

Unbelievable! Fluoridation is one big scam and the promoters are all artful liars. Mass-poisoners infact. Orica Chemicals benefitted from these illegal sales of course! They’re all culpable in this fluoride-fraud and the HSNO Act breaches made. Even the ethics committee which approved the Northland DHB’s illegal trial.

It’s high time our corporation colluding government rejected and banned fluoridation (fluoride-poisoning) in Aotearoa NZ.

Maybe if the tourism industry was detrimentally affected they would reject fluoridation (NZ is an industrial fluoride toxic waste dumping ground). Especially for our council who puts tourism before the health and safety of our local communities.

Amazing how they can all twist the mass fluoride-poisoning of communities into a supposed ‘health benefit’ especially for Maori!

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Roos victims of factory fluoride DEBORAH GOUGH February 21, 2010SCORES of starving and pain-ridden kangaroos have been culled after developing tooth and bone deformities from breathing and ingesting fluoride emissions.

Many more are believed to be suffering from growths that will kill them.

The affected kangaroos are living near the Alcoa aluminium smelter in Portland, in the state's south-west, and the Austral Bricks factory at Craigieburn.

Autopsies performed at Melbourne University on 49 kangaroos culled at Alcoa on a single day last year found all but one were suffering from flurosis, which leads to excessive bone growths, or lesions, on joints in the paws, ankles and calves.

It can also cause tooth and jaw deformities that hinder eating and foraging.

The Sunday Age has been told more than 200 ill kangaroos living near both affected sites have been culled in recent years, but this figure could not be confirmed.

The Environment Protection Authority was first warned of the effect of fluoride dust and fumes on kangaroos living near the Alcoa smelter in 2005, although lameness was detected in some animals grazing there as early as 2001.

Jenny Charles, associate professor in veterinary pathology at Melbourne University, said research had found that up to 90 per cent of the roughly 130 kangaroos living at the Portland site had some form of flurosis on their teeth and a quarter had visible limb lumps.

Dr Charles said autopsies on Craigieburn kangaroos showed lower levels of fluoride in their systems, but the effects of flurosis seemed to be worse. Other foraging animals may also be affected.

Wildlife Victoria alerted the Department of Sustainability and Environment to the plight of the Craigieburn kangaroos in 2008. Wildlife shelter operator Manfred Zabinskas told The Sunday Age last week that he had been horrified when he saw how many kangaroos were sick. ''They were in real pain,'' he said.

New World Order Fluoride Destroyed a Beautiful Body and Mind 5 Cancers see Dr. Marcus EPA.

Saturday, February 20, 2010

One final shot in fluoride battle Rebecca Lollback | 20th February 2010THE fluoride battle is not yet over, with Rous Water seeking legal advice on whether they can refuse a NSW Health directive to fluoridate the water supplies of Ballina, Lismore and Richmond Valley councils.At Rous Water’s meeting this week, a motion to obtain more information on the effects of fluoride on ‘human health and the environment’ was deferred until next month.If approved, it would put the fluoridation process on hold.It could even lead to Rous Water refusing to enact the directive and approvals issued by NSW Health.Rous Water’s acting general manager, Wayne Franklin, said staff were now getting legal advice on the matter.“Councillors want to make sure that there has been adequate consideration,” he said.“There are some councillors and community members who don’t want fluoridation.“But we’re seeking advice and we’ll report that back to the council next month.Rous Water chairman Col Sullivan said each council had already made its decision.“But let’s get a legal ruling on it,” he said.“I don’t want us to support something that’s illegal just because of the politics of it.”This comes as an independent report recommended Rous Water not make a determination on the review of environmental factors for the construction of the dosing plants.Ballina Fluoridation-Free Network spokeswoman, Ilga Sleja, said she was pleased to see the issue was ‘starting to be addressed properly’.“The councillors are being quite courageous in asking these questions,” she said.“They have a responsibility to the community and they’re realising that.”But a spokeswoman for NSW Health said Rous Water had ‘certain legal rights and obligations’.“NSW Health would make a decision on what action, if any, was taken on Rous Water’s decision to not fluoridate if and when that decision was made,” she said.

......"Oral health continues to be a major health issue in Harlem and in similar communities where historically, there has been little or no access to dental care," said Dr. James King, assistant clinical professor in the Columbia University College of Dental Medicine and the Director of Dentistry at Harlem Hospital Center. "A link between oral health and cardiovascular disease has already been established. Dr. Noble and his collaborators have found a potential new link between neurological conditions and a disease like periodontitis.”..........

Friday, February 19, 2010

UK - Lymington Times - Protest letter marks fluoride anniversary

Protest letter marks fluoride anniversaryANTI-FLUORIDE campaigners will hand-deliver a letter of protest to NHS chiefs a year on from the controversial chemical being approved for use in Totton's water supplies.About 190,000 people could be affected by the plan for Southampton and surrounding areas, agreed in February last year by the South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) to combat child tooth decay hi the city.Because of the layout of the pipes, 8,000 Totton residents may also have the chemical added to their water supply if the plan goes ahead. Opponents are attempting to block it through a pending judicial review and complaints to ombudsmen.Campaign group Hampshire Against Fluoridation (HAF) said scientists, professors and MPs were among the 100 people who signed the open letter to be handed in at the SHA's headquarters in Newbury on Friday February 26th.The message marks the one-year anniversary of the SHA's decision to approve Southampton Primary Care Trust's proposal and sums up the developments of the past year.HAF chairman John Spottiswood, told the 'A&T': "We are concerned that precious NHS funds are being used to force through a scheme that the local community do not want."It is madness that the health authorities plan to spend £400,000 of our taxpayers' money to force us tohave something in our water that local people have repeatedly said in surveys — including 72% at the so-called public consultation — that they do not want. This is an abuse of power and a misuse of public funds." The 72% figure was from responses to the consultation but a Mori poll carried out by the SHA showed 38% opposed fluoride against 32% in support.A 15,000-name petition was gathered by opponents who fear it has implications ranging from cancer to mottling of teeth — which is the only side-effect accepted by the NHSThe SHA said last year that i "remains confident that the decision that has been made by the SHA boar was carried out in accordance wit the relevant legislation laid down b parliament and is in the best interests of the health of local people".

Friday February 19 2010Why wait another three years before John Gormley's fluoride safety study is ready (Irish Independent, February 13) when he, like the rest of Europe, has already found fluoridation to be both unsafe and ineffective?

It took him years of researching the international evidence (because no independent studies have ever been done here), and he brought many outside experts to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Health and Children, before he produced in late 2006 a report that won the approval of many committee members.

However, for political reasons, it was blocked by the usual built-in Fianna Fail/PD committee majority. Fortunately, www.fluoridereports.com has made it available to the public on the internet so people can read its main conclusion.

Fluoride in drinking water is not safe for bottle-fed babies and fluoridation should therefore stop. Since we have the lowest level of breast feeding in all of Europe at 40pc this advice was, and still is, very relevant to tens of thousands of parents.

And, as if to highlight how urgent the issue remains, last December both the American Dental Association and the US Centres for Disease Control re-issued their original advice that parents should not make up formula with fluoridated tap water because of the risk of dental fluorosis.

Our Health Minister, however, securely back in the Fianna Fail fold, recently issued a progress report on fluoride which described the permanent and untreatable disfigurement that is obvious dental fluorosis as "a cosmetic condition but not a health problem".

With John Gormley's 2006 fluoridation report confirming that more and more Irish teenagers are now affected by this irreversible condition, a continuing cover-up of yet another health system failure is totally unacceptable.Robert Pocock DUBLIN 2Irish Independent

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Australia

To Fluoride Or Not To Fluoride - Waterloo Will Vote

A look at three dental school clinics for GKAS Posted Feb. 16, 2010 By Karen FoxNew York—Three New York dental schools opened their doors Feb. 5, welcoming a group of ADA leaders and dental industry sponsors in for a glimpse of Give Kids A Smile activities.The day begins: ADA President Ron Tankersley Feb. 5 addresses the Henry Schein Dental breakfast event in New York. "Give Kids A Smile highlights to policymakers the challenges that low income families have in getting access to dental care.".............Give Kids A Smile was created to highlight the ongoing challenges that underserved children face in accessing oral health care, and to build support among policymakers for public and private solutions that provide regular access.

..........Dental caries continues to be the most chronic disorder in children, and we really see that in our work in the community," said Dr. Moursi. "Unfortunately, it's a problem that continues to grow, especially in children age 5 and younger, and those from families with significant financial obstacles."

...............Underactive thyroids are usually provoked by a disease, environmental toxins, unbalanced diet, medication (lithium, phenyl-butazane), extended stress, chronic yeast infections, or genetic tendency. Environmental toxins are major culprits. These can come from excess ingestion of fluoride from fluoridated tap or bottled water and toothpaste; mercury in dental fillings; vaccines containing mercury; smoking; chlorinated pesticides; and chemicals in plastics. Drinking too much water with added fluoride and chlorine can provoke hypothyroidism. Fluoride, chlorine, and iodine are chemically similar. ..................

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Fluoridation damages bones as well as teethWednesday, 17 February 2010, 9:20 amPress Release: Fluoride Action Network Fluoridation damages bones as well as teethLatest research shows that children with teeth damaged by fluoride (30% in fluoridated NZ communities) also have worse bone problems than others – something fluoridation opponents have said for years but promoters like the Ministry of Health continue to deny.

It has long been known that fluoridation causes dental fluorosis – doubling the rate compared with unfluoridated communities according to NZ and overseas studies. Dental fluorosis is a defect in tooth enamel, caused by fluoride. The spots can be white or yellow, and tend to crumble, needing expensive treatment.

Wrist x-rays reveal that 96% of Tibetan children with dental fluorosis had “developmental skeletal abnormalities" including carpal bone hardening or thickening.

A British Medical Journal study reports that older white women from fluoridated communities have a 32% higher rate of wrist fracture. A Mexican study also links dental fluorosis to increased bone fractures.

A Rheumatology International study links naturally fluoridated water to knee osteoarthritis in amounts many Americans consume daily.

These are all related to early stage skeletal fluorosis, which commonly appears as misdiagnosed “arthritis”. Arthritis, including skeletal fluorosis, costs NZ about $2 billion per year.

“Fluoridation promoters like the Ministry of Health continue to mislead the public by saying that dental fluorosis is ‘just cosmetic’, while even WHO admits it is the first outward sign of long term fluoride poisoning. This is grossly negligent, and a breach of the Ministry’s statutory duty” says Mark Atkin on behalf of the Fluoridation-free NZ Campaign and Fluoride Action Network NZ, adding “Instead of their myopic drive to force this toxin on everyone, they should admit that fluoridation doesn’t work, puts people at risk, and stop pushing it.”

Recent research shows that the most important time to avoid fluoride is in the first year of life, exactly when bottle-fed babies get overdosed by a factor of 200 times if their formula is made with fluoridated water, says Mr Atkin. Last year the American Dental Association reiterated its warning not to make up baby formula with fluoridated water. “Again, the Ministry puts babies at risk by denying the warning, even though it is part of our own food standards documentation: further gross negligence by the Ministry” concludes Mr Atkin.

UK - Hampshire:Anti-fluoridation lobby is writing to 220 politicians to see if they still agree with 2003 Water Act.

Daily EchoSo is this what you voted for?By Jon Reevejon.reeve@dailyecho.co.ukIS this what you thought you were voting for?That is the question Hampshire campaigners are asking of every MP who passed the law giving local people the power to decide on controversial schemes to fluoridate water supplies.Hampshire Against Fluoridation (HAF) is writing to the 220 politicians, including Southampton representatives John Denham and Alan Whitehead, who voted for the Water Act in 2003, to see if they still agree with it.The group hopes the responses will provide a springboard towards getting the laws scrapped.Campaigners argue promises made when the proposed laws were debated in the House of Commons have been broken. Ministers said a "clear majority" of local people would have to be in favour for a scheme to fluoridate tap water to get the green light. But health chiefs last year unanimously passed plans to fluoridate supplies to almost 200,000 Hampshire homes despite widespread public opposition.More than 10,000 people responded to South Central Strategic Health Authority's consultation on the scheme -affecting parts of Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton, Netley and . Rownhams - with 72 per cent of those from the affected area saying they were against it.In a separate phone poll of 2,000 residents, 38 per cent said they opposed fluoridation, com-pared to 32 per cent in favour.Since the scheme - the first to be introduced since the 2003 law came into force - was approved, a 15,000-name petition has been handed to the Prime Minister calling for him to step in and overturn the decision.The SHA argues it did every thing the law and Government guidelines required of it during the consultation, and the decision was made in the best interests of the health of local people.A judicial review has been lodged through the courts, and senior judges are this year expected to study whether the health authority should have had to listen to public opinion. HAF is now asking MPs who voted through the law if they would still support it, knowing that public opinion could be ignored.The group believes Government assurances swayed the vote. During the Commons debate, health minister Melanie Johnson said: "There is a difficulty in weighing up the responses, but whatever the case, local opinion must be in favour of the proposal. A clear majority should be in favour of fluoridation."Similar promises were made in 2005 when the rules on fluoride consultations went through Parliament.HAF argues that putting the decision in the hands of the 12 un-elected SHA board members is "undemocratic and ethically wrong", and goes against those assurances.Member Bill Edmunds said he hopes MPs' responses will help put more pressure on the Government to change the rules. "It will be interesting to see how many do return the form - if we get a good response it would help to get a fresh look at the legislation," he said.

Whistle Where You Work #10: Consumer Product Safety; Whistleblowing at the EPA

Lone voice: Stop adding fluoride to city's waterAbout 70% of the U.S. water supply is fluoridated. Dubuquer argues it's not only unnecessary, it's a toxin.BY ANDY PIPER TH STAFF WRITER Sandy Amberg is serious when she says one of her goals in life is to not take it too seriously. So, she wasn't looking for a fight when she requested the Dubuque City Council consider ending the practice of fluoridating the city's drinking water.

When she was confronted with the fact that the American Dental Association, the Centers for Disease Control and other national health organizations all support the practice, she responded that she hadn't come to argue the pros and cons of fluoride and health.

"That's a whole separate debate," Amberg said. "But the waste. Only 3 percent of the water that we use is actually drunk."

The rest, she says, drains into the environment, and fluoride is classified as a hazardous material. Not to mention the $22,000 per year the city spends on fluoridation, which mostly misses its intended target, human teeth.

Amberg might be a lone voice in Dubuque, but she's far from alone. From Plant City, Fla., to Marine City, Mich., to San Diego, Calif., city officials are contemplating whether to end the practice of fluoridating Sandy Amberg water. Those citiespurchasing the fluoride, but of maintaining storage tanks and equipment. Dubuque plans to upgrade its tank this year for $75,000.

Amberg began researching the topic after talking to her son, Mark, who is part of a group that asked the City Council in Iowa City to end fluoridation. The request gained more traction in Iowa City, which scheduled a public hearing in March, than in Dubuque. Dubuque City Councilmen Ric Jones and Kevin Lynch voted against accepting Amberg's presentation.

About 70 percent of the U.S. water supply is fluoridated. Amberg told the council that the fluoride marketed to cities is scraped from the smokestacks of fertilizer and aluminum manufacturers.

"It is a toxin and the companies don't need to dispose of it if they can ship it to cities who add it to their water," Amberg said. "Fluoride is the only thing added to drinking water that does not enhance it. Chlorine, for instance, kills bacteria."

The health debate is wide ranging. An Internet search quickly locates dozens of articles such as "The Fluoride Conspiracy" and "Why I am now officially opposed to adding fluoride to drinking water," by Dr. Hardy Limeback, a professor of preventive dentistry in Toronto. Competing forums exist in just as great a number, such as Common Fluoride Myths, which disputes the claims of cancer risk, etc. The Centers for Disease Control lists fluoridation as one of the 10 Great Public Health Achievements of the 20th Century.

Water Department Manager Bob Green said fluoride is an acid and that if it is consumed in high concentrations it could create health problems.

"However, extensive research that has been conducted reveals the correct level of fluoride -- 1.0 to 1.2 parts per million -- in drinking water has greatly improved the dental health of consumers," Green said. "Early studies suggesting that fluoride was a possible cancer-causing chemical to humans proved to be unsubstantiated."

Amberg makes an ethical argument as well. Since fluoride is classified as a medication, shouldn't people have a choice to use it? The CDC acknowledges there are other ways to get fluoride, such as toothpaste and mouth wash, but the common good is best served by adding it to water so poor families don't have to purchase other fluoridated products.

February 15, 2010 By Terry Pender, Record staffWATERLOO — Opponents of adding fluoride to drinking water do not like the proposed question for this fall’s referendum on whether to continue the practice in this city.After parsing many different versions, staff at the Region of Waterloo, which is responsible for the treatment of drinking water in this area, want this question on ballots in Waterloo for the Oct. 25 municipal elections: “Should the Region of Waterloo continue to fluoridate your municipal water?”A regional committee will consider the question Tuesday. If approved a public meeting is scheduled for March 9 to hear feedback.A couple of the people who sought the referendum in the first place do not like the proposed question.Waterloo Coun. Angela Vieth, said the question does not give people enough information about what is currently going into their drinking water in the efforts to fight tooth decay.Vieth said: “If I were wording this, this is what I would say: ‘Should the Region of Waterloo continue to add hydroflourosilicic acid containing contaminants of arsenic, lead and mercury to your drinking water? Yes or no?”Vieth said the region’s proposed question fails “absolutely” to convey what’s happening now.“I believe that people need to know the product that is being added to the water that they drink every day,” Vieth said.“It’s an inorganic product that contains arsenic, lead and mercury. And I just don’t understand how our council can condone adding this to the water our constituents drink. It baffles me,” Vieth said.There are several other versions that were rejected by staff, but could be adopted by regional councillors, such as:Do you support the continued fluoridation of your municipal water?Should the Region of Waterloo fluoridate your municipal water?Are you in favour of the Region of Waterloo continuing to flouridate your municipal water?Do you support fluoridation of the municipal (drinking) water (supply)?Do you support the continued fluoridation of your public water supply?Regional staff say the question should make it clear the water is now fluoridated and that the region does it.Robert Fleming of the citizens’ group WaterlooWatch does not like the proposed question either.“Why not ask the real question, looming for decades but never spoken aloud? Should the region continue adding hydroflourosilicic acid containing inorganic fluoride and traces of arsenic, mercury, lead in your municipal drinking water? That’s the real question,” Fleming said.Regional staff say the proposed question was developed under the terms of the Municipal Elections Act.“The ballot question must be clear and must be neutral,” Fleming said.“The question being suggested by staff is biased and not fully disclosing of what citizens will be asked to vote on,” Fleming said.For decades fluoride has been added to the drinking water in Waterloo in an effort to prevent tooth decay. It is not added to the water in Kitchener.

The difficulties low-income Illinoisans encounter in obtaining dental care are no secret, a state official says.

But amid a recession and a multibillion-dollar state budget deficit, the tens of millions of dollars that would be needed to make a dent in the problem aren’t available, Illinois Medicaid director Theresa Eagleson said.

“I don’t think the dental-access issue is an Illinois problem alone,” she said. “And it’s not that people don’t want to fix this problem, or other access issues in pockets of the state. It’s a balancing act all the time between less money available and people in need and priorities.”

Decades of low and slow payments through Medicaid — which pays health-care bills for certain low- and moderate-income people — have driven away most Illinois dentists.

At most, fewer than one out of every three Illinois dentists is signed up to bill the program. And statistics indicate that as few as 10 percent of Illinois dentists are regularly billing Medicaid for service...........

Monday, February 15, 2010

FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK Newsletter

FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORKhttp://www.FluorideAlert.Org FAN Bulletin 2011: The Ontario triumvirate and other news itemsJanuary 14, 2010We are sorry you have not received any bulletins from us for some time. We are experiencing some difficulties with our server and not every one on our list is receiving them -including ourselves! We would appreciate it if you did receive this bulletin to send us a simple message - RECEIVED. This way we will be able to get some idea how badly our service has been disrupted. Meanwhile, FAN continues to update our latest news section on a daily basis see http://www.FluorideAlert.org (link in left column on homepage) as well as updating the number of signatories to the crucially important Professionals' Statement calling for an end to fluoridation worldwide. Total now stands at 2720.

Thank you again to all those who made our end of the year fundraising such a successful and exciting event. Our grand total was $47,610.19 from 592 donors. This was the largest amount raised, and the most donors, in FAN's history.

If you contributed and haven't received a DVD, please email Ellen at info@fluoridealert.org with your mailing address and she will send you one.

NEWS ITEMS

1) THE ONTARIO TRIUMVIRATE

According to Wikipedia, a triumvirate (from Latin, "of three men") is a political regime dominated by three powerful individuals. In the case of pushing for fluoridation in Ontario those three men are Dr. Peter Cooney (Chief Dental Office, Health Canada); Dr. Frank Stechey, president of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario (RCDSO) and Dr. Ira Kirshen, president of the Ontario Dental Association (ODA).

FAN put out in Bulletin 2009, on December 24, 2009, entitled "Chilling Winds from Canada" which suggested that there were moves afoot to introduce mandatory fluoridation into Ontario and the three bodies above were coordinating this effort. This bulletin produced an angry response from Peggi Mace a spokesperson for the RCDSO. We have printed her email below. It would appear that our correspondent in Ontario may have overstated the extent to which the effort to introduce mandatory fluoridation has been formalized by these three bodies, however there is no question that there is, a) a lot of "cooperation" between these bodies on promoting fluoridation, including joint appearances at public meetings; b) that at least one of them is calling on the leader of the Province to introduce mandatory fluoridation; c) all three present only one side of the issue, making exaggerated claims and refusing to back up their claims with citations from the scientific literature when challenged to do so and d) all three have combined to make Ontario an uncomfortable place to practice dentistry if a dentist holds a different point of view, and expresses his or her views in pubic.

Readers can get a glimpse of the triumvirate in action in the videotaped clips of the Thunder Bay hearings in July, 2009, where Dr. Frank Stechey, Dr. Ira Kirshen and Dr. Peter Cooney, all spoke. If these links are not live in your system please copy in the URLs into your search location.

For the record the Thunder Bay Council on July 21, 2009 voted against proceeding any further with the effort to fluoridate Thunder Bay's water.

In the minutes of he RCDSO meeting held on June 4, 2009, we find the following: "Support for Fluoridation- Council approved a joint effort with the leadership of the College and the Ontario Dental Association to meet and develop an approach to promote the use of fluoridation in all Ontario municipalities with one unified approach throughout the province."

When the RCDSO talks about promoting "fluoridation in ALL Ontario municipalities with ONE UNIFIED APPROACH THROUGHOUT THE PROVINCE" (my emphasis) those words look very much like mandatory fluoridation, even more so when one knows that the president of one half of this cooperative effort is on record as stating that he wants the premier of Ontario to introduce mandatory fluoridation (see clip 1 above).

The quote above also reappears above in an article by Dr. Stechey in the August-Sept 2009 issue of Dispatch (link is slow to open), the newsletter of the RCDSO.

In the same issue of this newsletter is an article from Dr. Peter Cooney giving his typical one-sided promotion of fluoridation; an article about the meeting held in Geneva, Switzerland in 2006, organized by the WHO, IADR and FDI (Peter Cooney heads one of the FDI committees), which issued a statement containing the immortal phrase: "universal access to fluoride for dental health is a part of the basic human right to health" and a letter from the Thunder Bay District Health Unit thanking the RCDSO for their (unsuccessful!) efforts to help fluoridate Thunder Bay.

It appears from a Memo from the Thunder Bay Health Unit that Dr. Peter Cooney was paid about $24,000 for services he rendered to Thunder Bay. Citizens are trying to find out just what "services" he was paid for. Was he paid for lobbying the councilors on fluoridation? Or for something else? Did he do this when he was also being paid by Health Canada? We will report back when these answers are found.

Returning to Peggi Mace's email. her claim that our bulletin was "completely erroneous and without substance" is inaccurate. Our correspondent may have overstated the extent to which the effort to introduce mandatory fluoridation into Ontario had been institutionalized, but there are clearly efforts afoot to do so, as the videoclip from Dr. Ira Kirshwin makes clear. Moreover, the wording of a statement made in the minutes of RCDSO looks very much in tune with that effort. So there was "substance" to our bulletin.

In addition Peggi Mace's claim that "It is completely inaccurate to state that 'RCDSO has a policy forcing dentists to support fluoridation publicly' and there is no legal basis in Ontario law to state that RCDSO 'would take action against any dentist who didn't adhere to this policy'" has to be reviewed in terms of the statement that Dr. Stechey, President of the RCDSO, made at the Thunder Bay meeting (see videoclip 2 above). I think Mace is using mealymouth words to try to downplay what any reasonable person would see as an out and out threat by Dr. Stechey to dentists who step out of line on fluoridation. Whether such enquiries by the RCDSO would lead to legal action or if they had a legal basis to do so, is quite beside the point. Professional bodies have a way of influencing the behavior of their membership without resorting to legal action. For example, they can simply remove the dentist's license to practice.

4. SAVE THE DATE The 4th Citizens' Conference on Fluoride - July 23 - 27 on the campus of St. Lawrence University, Canton, NY. This conference will follow shortly after a summit of Canadian citizens fighting fluoridation so we anticipate a report of some important developments from our neighbors to the North. Canton is located 4 hours from Toronto, 2 hours from Montreal and one hour from Ottawa.

5. ONLINE: WORDS OF THE ANTI-FLUORIDATION SONG: "GET IT OUT!" by Alex WilsonThe words can be adapted for your community.

6. Konradin Kreuzer. I received this email from Peter Meiers in Germany:

Dear all,

I have just been informed of the loss of another long-time anti-fluoridefighter: Konradin Kreuzer, of Flüh, Switzerland, passed away on February12. It was mainly due to his year-long efforts (since the late 1960's), incooperation with Rudolf Ziegelbecker, that fluoridation of Basel wasstopped in 2003.

Aged 88, Konradin Kreuzer was still working on his website to present thearguments against fluoride and fluoridation:

http://www.nux.ch/fluor/index.html

He will be sorely missed.

Regards, Peter

We have more exciting news to share with you on campaign plans for 2010, but that will have to wait till the next bulletin.

Paul Connett

Email from Peggi Mace, RCDSO, to Paul Connett

Jan 4, 2010

Dear Mr. Connett,

On behalf of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario, I want to bring to your attention the inaccurate information that was contained in the e-mailed FAN Bulletin titled "Chilling winds from Ontario" and dated December 24, 2009. As the regulatory body mandated by Ontario's Regulated Health Professions Act to regulate the dental profession in Ontario in the interests of public protection and safety, it is important that the record be set straight.

The information reported in that bulletin from "one of your Canadian contacts" was completely erroneous and without substance. Unfortunately your bulletin has conveyed error after error in describing the College, our activities and policies and the legal regulations that exist in Ontario.

There is no joint committee of the Ontario Dental Association, the Ontario Public Health Association and the RCDSO. There is no lobbying being done by the RCDSO "to set up and fund a fluoridation office with the sole control over all information that the public can receive about fluoridation."

It is completely inaccurate to state that "RCDSO has a policy forcing dentists to support fluoridation publicly" and there is no legal basis in Ontario law to state that RCDSO "would take action against any dentist who didn't adhere to this policy."

Also, the College's governing Council has not passed any motions or resolutions to support the formation of an Ontario Fluoridation Office or a policy of mandatory fluoridation. The College is not required by law to hold an annual general meeting. The College is accountable to the provincial Minister of Health and Long-Term Care and numerous other government bodies and commissions for its actions.

It is very troubling that you would share such completely inaccurate information without ensuring its accuracy. Your bulletin has completely misrepresented RCDSO's role as a regulator and our involvement in this important public health issue.

Peggi MaceCommunications Director Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario

Anger fuels water-fluoridation debate in WatsonvilleThe Santa Cruz County town, which officials say is experiencing a dental-decay epidemic, voted in 2002 to block fluoridation of the city's water. The City Council is moving closer to approval.By Steve ChawkinsFebruary 15, 2010The editorial in the Watsonville Register-Pajaronian offered local voters some blunt advice: "Shield your eyes," it said, "because the City Council is preparing to spit in your face."

That was this month, as the council inched toward finally fluoridating the city's water -- a state-mandated action that has been bitterly debated since city residents narrowly voted to block it in 2002. At a council meeting in January, an anti-fluoridation activist held up a sign alluding to Nazis. When speakers threatened to boycott local businesses if fluoridation goes through, a council member told them to jump off the parking-garage roof.Although the argument in the Santa Cruz County agricultural town of 50,000 has raged for years, people on both sides see a resolution as urgent.

Health officials say that Watsonville, with a large population of migrant workers, is in the throes of a dental-decay epidemic. One study of local students found an average of two dental abscesses in every classroom, not to mention an outsize number of cavities.

Still, one of the biggest employers in town -- the Martinelli beverage company, famous for its sparkling apple cider -- said it would rather move a planned expansion elsewhere than use fluoridated water in a new line of juices.

"We believe fluoride is bad for your body so, morally and ethically, we simply cannot put that water in our products," said John Martinelli, president of S. Martinelli & Co., his family's business for 142 years. "If half the people in this town don't want to be mass-medicated, then we shouldn't be."

Although water supplies across the U.S. have been fluoridated for decades and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has called the process "one of the 10 great public health achievements of the 20th Century," California has been late to embrace it. Opponents link it to bone cancer, thyroid problems, kidney malfunction, fetal damage and a host of other conditions. Their critics, including most mainstream medical and dental organizations, accuse them of distorting scientific studies.

Suspicion of fluoridation comes from the right and the left. Some see it as a dangerous erosion of liberty. Others believe it's an underhanded way for businesses to get rid of industrial waste.

In Watsonville, the issue is also economic.

Fields surrounding Watsonville are planted with strawberries, raspberries and a variety of vegetables. But unemployment in the city is estimated at 25%, in part because of the slow agricultural season.

Martinelli's nonalcoholic sparkling cider was concocted during Prohibition and has been a reliable stand-in for champagne ever since. The company's cider and apple juice use no water except that in the fruit the company buys by the ton from area orchards.

But this summer, the company plans to roll out juices -- acai, pomegranate, blueberry and others -- made from concentrate and water. And if that water is fluoridated, Martinelli said, customers will balk.

"What we're talking about is our growth opportunity," said Martinelli, who says the expansion could add dozens of workers to his 200-person staff. "Watsonville won't benefit from the growth of our business if I have to take it somewhere else."

Despite facing a $5 million deficit, city officials said they might help Martinelli pay for the high-tech equipment required to remove fluoride from water.

"We want to make sure he feels welcome to stay in Watsonville," said Councilman Manuel Bersamin, a fluoridation supporter. "He heads a company that placed Watsonville on the map."..........................

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Comparison

A study links thyroid disease with human exposure to perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). PFOA is a persistent organic chemical used in industrial and consumer goods including most nonstick cookware and stain- and water-resistant coatings for carpets and fabrics.

The study included nearly 4000 adults aged 20 and older whose blood serum was sampled between 1999 and 2006 for PFOA.

The researchers found that the individuals with the highest PFOA concentrations were more than twice as likely to report current thyroid disease.

Previous animal studies carried out by other scientists have shown that the compounds can affect the function of the mammalian thyroid hormone system. This system is essential for maintaining heart rate, regulating body temperature and supporting many other body functions, including metabolism, reproduction, digestion and mental health.Sources:Eurekalert January 21, 2010 Environmental Health Perspectives January 7, 2010

Saturday, February 13, 2010

Are you drinking poison?

Children's Dental Health The Pew Children's Dental Campaign is working to ensure that more children receive dental care and benefit from policies proven to prevent tooth decay.

We are mounting a national campaign to raise awareness of the problem, recruit influential leaders to call for change, and showcase states that have made progress and can serve as models for pragmatic, cost-effective reform. Our advocacy efforts are targeted at states where policy changes can dramatically improve children’s lives.

The problems affecting children’s dental health are severe. Dental care is the single greatest unmet need for health services among children. Tooth decay is the most common childhood disease, affecting nearly 60 percent of children. For some it’s getting worse—between 1994 and 2004 it increased by 15 percent among kids aged two to five. Eighty percent of dental disease in children is concentrated in 25 percent of kids and children from poor families face disproportionately high barriers to getting care. The consequences can be devastating to those from low-income and minority households.

Some problems may be intractable. This one is not. Working in concert with lawmakers and other government officials, dental providers, national, state and local organizations, researchers, advocates and the private sector, the Pew Center on the States can help millions of kids maintain healthy teeth —making it possible for young children to thrive in school and become healthy, productive adults.

Friday, February 12, 2010

Australia - Kim Booth dosent answer fluoride questions.flv (Sic)

UK - Daily Echo - It's time to squash these quangos. . .

It's time to squash these quangos. . .By David HarrisonLeader of New Forest District Liberal Democrats.IT is interesting to note that the Prime Minister has suddenly addressed the need to restore confidence in our democracy by suggesting that voters get the opportunity to change the voting system, to an alternative vote system, rather than a "first past the post" one.Cynics might think that the conversion to a more democratic way of thinking has come about a bit late, given that we are only weeks away from a General Election, the Labour party look certain to lose and it's a blundering attempt to gain the support of the Liberal Democrats should we have a result that gives no party an overall majority.Certainly, the Labour Party has wasted a very long time and a very large majority which would have enabled them to install a fully elected House of Lords. We still have a situation where Government legislation can be thrown out or stalled by people who have never had to face any kind of election and enjoy all the privileges of the House of Lords, by way of birth, not merit.

Fluoride

I don't think that local people were particularly impressed when Mr Brown visited Southampton with his Cabinet and when asked about the wisdom of adding fluoride to our tap water, told reporters: "It is for local people to decide".Well, actually it isn't! Nearly three quarters of the people who responded to a consultation said they didn't want it and our unelected, unaccountable, Strategic Health Authority are trying to impose it because they know what is good for us.If the Government is really serious about restoring democracy, they would have addressed the real problem that •. so much public spending is controlled not by MPs or councillors but by non-departmental public bodies, otherwise known as quangos.At the last official count of public bodies, there were 790 of them, employing 92,500 staff and spending £43bn of your money. Whatever the result of the election, I'm hoping that high on the list of the next Government will be restoring the powers of the quangos to elected people. It is your money. You should have a right to remove the people who don't deliver good services at a price you are willing to pay.The power of MPs and councillors has diminished almost in direct proportion to the power now held by quangos. This is a really important issue and not one that is being faced up to.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

READER DOESN'T BUY INTO THE PRO-FLUORIDE DEBATE Posted By Posted 21 hours agoSir:Regarding Hazel Millholland's letter Let's listen to the experts on the Fluoride issue. Ms. Millholland states correctly that there was only one speaker to defend the practice of adding fluoride to the water in a recent open forum at city hall. We have been fed misleading and inaccurate information for so many years that people are finally waking up and realizing that fluoride in our water is not the panacea for healthy teeth after all. It should be enough to stop the practice when we realize that fluoride is a deadly poison in the same category as arsenic and lead, but sadly, that fact alone is not enough.

The speaker told the audience that artificial water fluoridation has been adopted in 20

countries based on 140 studies. The studies used by proponents of fluoridation are outdated and use questionable evidence to support preconceived beliefs. There is much more recent, readily available, scientific evidence clearly showing the deleterious affects of fluoride on the body.

What is it that over 90 per cent of British Columbia and Quebec, all of Japan and China, 98 per cent of Europe, and over three quarters of the world's population in general know, that we don't, or refuse to accept. Of the 6.8 billion people living in the world today 6.4 billion (94 per cent) do not use artificial water fluoridation. Ms. Millholland writes that we "know through personal experiences the benefits of fluoridated water." I know few people in Sarnia who don't have cavities but I do know, from personal experience, that the mottling on far too many children's teeth, due to many years of fluoride ingestion, are the early signs of fluoride poisoning (fluorosis). She quotes Dr. Kirshen from the ODA who "estimates that for every dollar invested in water fluoridation it saves $38 in dental costs."

Research shows that there is no significant difference in the number of cavities in fluoridated and unfluoridated communities but dentists are equally busy in both. She continues that water fluoridation "benefits all residents in a community, regardless of age, socioeconomic status, education or employment." It doesn't benefit anyone but it does affect them.

Why is it that elected officials have taken over the job of medical professionals? Why is it that politicians, or in the case of a plebiscite, my next-door neighbours, get to decide what medication the rest of us should be taking. This is exactly the case with water fluoridation. Ms. Millholland is impressed that the Centres for Disease Control, "have cited the fluoridation of water as one of the top 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century." This has been a very successful marketing slogan for the CDC and the EPA over the years but there is no shred of evidence to back it up.

Like Hazel Millholland I would challenge everyone to get involved in the fluoridation debate but in doing so don't accept hearsay evidence from anyone calling themselves "experts." Get started by typing in "fluoridation" into a Google search.

Tooth brushing needs to be a day-care stapleFebruary 10, 2010 AS A pediatric dentist and mother of a 3-year-old who attends day care 10 hours a day, I am writing in response to the Feb. 3 editorial “Call off the toothbrush police.’’We see young children every day at Children’s Hospital Boston with pain and infection from untreated early childhood tooth decay. Children as young as 2 commonly present with eight or more cavities. Each year, we take more than 500 patients to the operating room to provide dental care under general anesthesia.

Ultimately, parents are responsible for the oral health care of their children. However, with many young children spending more time in preschool and day care than at home, tooth brushing during the day can help prevent and control tooth decay....

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

CBC News A University of Calgary health care economist says treating tooth decay in children under the age of five is becoming a significant drain on the medical system.

The latest statistics show the most common procedure in the operating room at the Children's Hospital is the extraction of children's teeth under general anesthetic.Herb Emery said 600 Calgary children under the age five require dental surgery each year.

"If you think of this as a completely preventable situation just with earlier care of the teeth the direct cost of treating this just in fees and facility billing alone is about $1.5-million a year."Pediatric dentists say some parents put their children to bed with a bottle that contains juice, formula, pop — or even alcohol. Some children end up with chronic mouth pain and infections.Pediatric dentist Dr. Leonard Smith said too many children are given too much sugar."These children are being exposed to a sugar source over an extended period of time while they're sleeping," he said. "Parents are putting soothers into their mouths and these soothers are dipped in honey or sugar."

Tuesday, February 09, 2010

Fox News - Mass Drugging Of Society With Lithium

The bit about smoking is over the top. Both my parents smoked. I remember being scared of the smoke in the streaming sunlight while sheltering in a garden Anderson shelter during the war. Don't blame them for smoking it was scary. I never suffered from the toxic affects nor my siblings. I don't smoke and never have but I think this is going too far. The exhaust from cars and lorries not forgetting planes are a far bigger threat to our health.

UK - Daily Echo - No going back if fluoride is put in water

No going back if fluoride is put in waterJennifer GodschallHAMPSHIRE'S heroic battle against fluoridation is a warning to all political parties.Its message is simple - when politicians discard democracy for dictatorship, the people wili discard the politicians.The Green Party is calling on voters to ditch pro-fluoride MPs and councillors. We need good dentists, not bad legislation. We cannot deselect the unelected SHA, but we can deselect their political masters - and we should do so.This Government thought a sham consultation would fool the electorate. When this failed, they resorted to blatant bullying, forcing people into accepting an arguably fascist policy.Thefluoridation laws are an abuse of democracy, human rights and medical ethics.The cynical strategy to deny theelectorate their constitutional rights on this issue must be overturned before it's too late.In America doctors have already mooted the idea of adding statins to drinking water. In Japan some think that lithium through the taps might help prevent depression and suicides.When we cross that line and start using the water supply as a conduit for medication, there's no going back.The terror laws have been shockingly abused - the principle of fluoridation is open to similar abuse. If dental issues can be treated via our drinking water, why not obesity? Why not add vitamins, or statins, or any other drugs in "safe" low doses?How far are the pro-fluoride brigade prepared to go? Are we all to suffer because politicians cannot resist lobbyists, whose pockets are as deep as their morals are shallow?Remember - the political mindset that allowed this legislation in the first place, is unlikely to be moved by ethical arguments in the future.

Monday, February 08, 2010

UK - Daily Echo - Spottiswoode's manifesto...

Spottiswoode's manifesto...KATE Bellenger (Daily Echo, January 25) asks the question; surely having an MP who acts in line with constituents' wishes is a good thing? John Spottiswoode's No F in Southampton campaign aims at getting local councillors and indeed MPs elected who are fighting to stop water fluoridation.All Green Party candidates support the No F campaign so primarily John Spottiswoode calls for voters to support Green Party candidates, but also for other antifluoridation candidates where there is no Green.More importantly in answer to the question Kate asks - anyone who supports fluoridation is saying that it is OK to forcibly medicate the whole population through their drinking water.This is against the democratic will of the 72 per cent who did not want fluoride in the so-called 'Public Consultation' and against the human rights of all those who object.Supporting fluoridation also breaks medical ethics. People must never force medication on anyone and medication must be based on the individual's needs. Therefore anyone who supports fluoridation is taking a deeply authoritarian and immoral stand and should not be re-elected at any level of government.Additionally, John Spottiswoode is standing against John Denham on a whole range of issues.He is against Labour's privatisation of public services, deplores the idea that students should start their working careers with a substantial debt for their academic efforts and of course he has written much outstanding work concerning today's most important challenges such as global warming, and has done so for at least the last fifteen years.The Green Party and John have wide ranging policies that are sensible and just, not just Green!JOE COX (Election Agent for John Spottiswoode).

Saturday, February 06, 2010

We don’t need dirty water, nor a rotten governmentPosted: Saturday, Feb 6th, 2010BY: NICK BULAICHWhenever the topic of water fluoridation and rotten teeth arises in Watsonville, it quickly turns into an issue of dirty water and rotten government.

When the California State Legislature passed a fluoridation law back in the 1990s, the stated purpose for enacting the law was for the “protection and maintenance of dental health,” and to “decrease the burden the Medi-Cal and Denti-Cal programs place upon the state’s limited funds.”

Since then, not one single chemical supplier or anyone from the state will say which specific fluoridation substance will provide dental health protection to the public and save the state some money.

Instead, the fluoridation pushers play a very deceiving game by making a vague statement like “fluoridation is great.” But they won’t say what makes it great, because if they do, they would be making a health claim and risk a lawsuit.

The substance, hydrofluorosilicic acid, commonly used for fluoridation in this country, has never been scientifically proven to be safe and effective if used to fight tooth decay. It is a byproduct of the phosphate-fertilizer industry and contains lead, arsenic and other contaminants.

Don’t fall for the deceit. No court has ordered the city to use a particular substance. No state law orders the city to use a particular substance. It’s the city’s pick. If the city is going to fluoridate, then it should only use a specific substance that has been proven to be safe and effective for fighting tooth decay. Only a rotten government would use an untested, unproven and tainted substance to fluoridate the water.

A “nonprofit” can pop up to offer almost $2 million to the city to inject an ugly chemical into our water, but the same group does not offer that kind of money to buy toothbrushes, toothpaste, or provide dental care for the poor kids. Doesn’t it look like someone is more interested in pushing the sale of someone else’s chemical waste than helping the kids?

In a recent Register-Pajaronian article, we learned that a paid lobbyist, who was the ex-boss of Mayor Luis Alejo, urged council members to accept a fluoridation funding agreement before the public was aware of the agreement.

One day before the council meeting on the fluoridation issue, the California Department of Public Health sent a letter to the city thanking the council for “adopting community water fluoridation.” That’s right, the state said this before the council meeting.

Another part of state fluoridation law is that no city can be forced to fluoridate unless all of the funding to set up and run a fluoridation program comes from an outside source. This means the city is not obligated to spend a single cent of your money. Not one cent!

The fluoridation contract offered to the city contains numerous clauses that would stick city’s residents with a bill. In a detailed letter to the council, I cited 21 different problems with the contract, yet council members Alejo, Bersamin and Rivas wanted to go full steam ahead without addressing a single one of my issues.

Once again, we see more rotten government in action. Luckily, we had four council members who did not go along with Alejo’s push.

Now, an ad hoc committee has been formed to study the fluoridation contract. Hopefully the committee will protect the public by insisting that only a proven and tested fluoridation substance be used and that not one cent is spent of the public’s funds to fluoridate.

Dirty water and rotten government, that’s what is happening in our city, and unless you stand up to tell your council members to protect the public and not waste our money, you are going to start getting dirty water and will keep getting more rotten government.

•••

Nick Bulaich is a Watsonville resident and one of the founding supporters of Measure S, which banned fluoride and any substance not approved by the FDA from being put in Watsonville’s water. The opinions of columnists are not necessarily those of the Register-Pajaronian.

.............A 2007 survey of Connecticut schoolchildren found that 31% of children in Head Start aged 2-4 have already experienced tooth decay and that 14% of those children had 5 or more teeth decayed or missing from decay. By Kindergarten, more than one in four children have experienced dental decay, 16% of which have untreated decay. According to the ADA, untreated oral diseases and conditions can have painful, disfiguring and lasting negative health consequences. Proper at-home care, early diagnosis, preventive treatments, and early intervention can prevent or halt the progress of most oral diseases............

UK - Daily Echo - Cameron.- 'I'm against plans to add fluoride

Cameron.- 'I'm against plans to add fluorideBy Julian Robinsonjulian.robinson@dailyecho.co.ukTHE man who is favourite to be Britain's next Prime Minister last night told the Daily Echo he was against plans to add fluoride to tap water.But David Cameron stopped short of joining the Daily Echo in calling for a referendum. He echoed rival Gordon Brown's stance that the decision on whether to give it the go-ahead should be made locallyThe controversial scheme, aimed at improving dental health, is currently the subject of a judicial review after fluoridation was given the green light across 200,000 homes in Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton and NetleyCritics say the chemical should not be added to water supplies accusing the scheme of being "compulsory medication".When asked about his views on whether the matter should be decided by the ballot box, the Tory leader said: "I have always taken the view that this is something that should be decided locally and I don't believe in compulsory fluoridation of water."In the last vote we had, I think I voted against that idea. But if there is a local process in place and a local decision can be made, I think that seems a fair way of doing it."His comments came during a two-stop tour of Hampshire in which he visited a training centre in Chandler's Ford and later fielded questions at Mountbatten School in Romsey as part of his "Cameron Direct" programme.He faced a grilling by an audience of more than 150 on subjects ranging from the expenses scandal to Fathers4Justice.During the question and answer session, he appeared to back the Government's academy schools - even though Southampton's two academies have proved controversial with parents, teachers and students since they were set up in 2008.Elsewhere he called for an end to the "top down" demand for housing, which he said was putting pressure on areas such as Romsey and called for more localised planning decisions.He also pledged to stage a "free vote" in the House of Commons on fox hunting and said he would vote to end the ban.He said: "I think it was a bad bit of law and brought the criminal justice system into disrepute."Earlier in the day he had called in to the New Career Skills Ltd headquarters in Chandler's Ford to see how those out of employment were developing the ability to work in new trades.The head of the electrical department at the organisation Cliff Baker said: "I would like to think he learned a lot - especially when he spoke to some of the people who had finished their training.' "We had some very frank discussions about where we were going and what was needed. There were no promises, but he listened.

Friday, February 05, 2010

Schuylkill Haven to stop adding fluoride to water supplyBY DUSTIN PANGONIS (STAFF WRITER dpangonis@republicanherald.com) Published: February 4, 2010 SCHUYLKILL HAVEN - The borough will stop adding fluoride to its water supply after a motion to keep adding the chemical was defeated at Wednesday's borough council meeting."I think we're doing an injustice by taking it out for our young people," council President Marlin W. Berger Jr. said.Marlin Berger, who was the only council member to speak Wednesday about his stance on the motion, said larger cities, such as Reading and Philadelphia, use fluoride in their water supply. The borough will save about $10,000, he said, but added alternatives such as fluoride treatment by dentists are very expensive. Marlin Berger acknowledged there is debate over the effectiveness of fluoride in preventing tooth decay, but said the practice has been successful in Schuylkill Haven."Our forefathers back in the '60s were able to put this in ... I think we've had very few complaints with this over the years," Marlin Berger said. In a telephone interview after the meeting, Marlin Berger said borough administrator Scott Graver brought the issue to council's attention.According to the Pennsylvania Rural Water Association, Marlin Berger said, not all state municipalities add fluoride to their water, and removing the chemical could cut costs.................

Sharing smiles: Community workers discuss ways to improve Chicago’s oral healthby Lisa OwadJan 27, 2010Children are more likely to have tooth decay than they are to have any chronic infectious disease, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And yet, children are nearly 3 times more likely to lack dental insurance than health insurance, according to the CDC. Those who live in poverty, both children and adults, suffer more than twice the amount of tooth decay, also known as dental caries.

“Oral health care is one of the biggest challenges in public health that exist today,” said Dr. Lee Francis, president and CEO of Erie Family Health Center in Chicago. On average, children who visit the Erie Family Dental clinic have five to six cavities...............................

UK - Daily Echo - Fluoride's coming at us from all directions

Fluoride's coming at us from all directionsTHE Government's proposed addition of folic acid to all bread has been abandoned because there would be no way to check the total daily intake.So what about the fluorides, now coming at us from all directions, from womb to tomb?The Government's recommended Medical Research Report on fluori-dation says 'Fluoride crosses the placenta and is incorporated into the developing conceptus... could plausibly be teratogenic' (ie. can cause malformation).That would be only a part of the chemical load children are now inheriting through the 300 quarts of blood pumped through them every day in their last month in the womb. A recent US Environmental Working Group study found an average of 200 industrial chemicals and pollutants in umbilical cord blood from babies born in 2004. The industrial chemicals, pollutants and pesticides included eight perfluoro- chemicals, used as stain and oil repellents, in fast food packaging, clothes, textiles, carpets, etc, including the Teflon and Scotchguardchemical, PFOA, recently categorised as a likely human carcinogen by the EPAs advisory board.Samples taken from almost 4,000 adults between 1999 and 2006, reports the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, found those with the highest 25 per cent of PFOA and PFOS were more than twice as likely to have thyroid disease than individuals with the lowest 50 per cent.Professor Galloway of Exeter University, said 'Our results highlight a real need for further research into the health effect of low level exposure to environmental chemicals like PFOA that are ubiquitous in the environment and in peoples' homes'.There are now 17 pages of fluoride pesticides on the PSD lists. Fluoride is now a corn fumigant.And the Government wants to add it to our drinking and bath water. Just how ubiquitous can it get?MJ REICHUN, Andover.

Thursday, February 04, 2010

Cr Jan Watt walked out of council on Tuesday over a discussion about fluoride.

Moral objection to fluoridationCarly Morrissey 4th February 2010IN a show of defiance, Cr Jan Watt decided to walk out on a Gympie Regional Council Works and Services Committee meeting discussion about fluoride on Tuesday.She said council was instructed by the Queensland Government to vote in favour of fluoridation and decide how they were going to implement it.Cr Watt said she had a conflict of interest with the discussion as she morally objected to mass medicating without the consent of the people.The State Government under Anna Bligh mandated in 2008 that fluoride be added to the water supply systems of Gympie, Tin Can Bay and Cooloola Coveby December 31 this year.Cr Watt said she had to make a point of not agreeing with fluoridation and said there were many conflicting studies on fluoride, some saying it didn’t work and others saying it was detrimental to health.She said council had to fluoridate and couldn’t go against the legislation.But there were other ways to deliver fluoride including tablets that would make it safer.“It’s (fluoridation’s) value is in doubt, I can’t with a full conscience participate in any debate,” she said.Cr Watt said the agenda item was an operational issue and she didn’t believe it was responsible to vote on it, given her views.On Tuesday, council approved a plan of how they would implement the fluoride, though the plan is yet to be ratified in a general meeting.By June, council will have called tenders for the project and engaged a contractor for new buildings.A part of the fluoridation project calls for a laboratory and new amenities at Cooloola Cove and one at Gympie.Council’s General Manager of Water and Sewage, Ian Schiefelbein, reported to council that the new buildings may need to be partly funded by council for the non-fluoride components.Sodium Fluoride Saturation plants will also need to be integrated into the three sites along with pipe work, fluoride detectors and safety equipment.

Capital works for the fluoridation scheme will be 100 per cent funded by the Queensland Government, however council has to meet rigorous conditions and cannot apply for funding until a concept design report, which council aims to complete this month, has been submitted.

Council will be adding sodium fluoride powder to the water supply, which is toxic unless dissolved in water.